The constitutional referendum on 22 May to re-define marriage draws nearer, and it appears that the support for the Dublin elite’s fashionable idea of recognizing same-sex “marriages” is declining, the Guardian reports.
For a year or so, opinion polls indicated an overwhelming support (up to 75%) for same-sex “marriage” – rather improbably high not only for a country with a Catholic culture like Ireland, but indeed for any country where people still keep their five senses together.
As the Guardian article suggests, the seemingly high support for the government’s plans may at least in part have been due to the manipulative and suggestive questions that were asked. “Most people in Ireland are very fair-minded so if you say to them ‘do you think gay people should be treated as everyone else?’ they will reply ‘yes, of course we do.’”
But there appears to be a growing awareness among Irish voters that this referendum is not at all about “equal rights”. In Ireland, just as everywhere else, already now everyone has the right to marry. In reality the question to be answered is whether marriage should be re-defined: it now is a union between a man and a woman with both a conjugal and a procreative purpose. The political establishment wants to transform it into a union of two persons irrespective of their sex and with no clear purpose. The result would not be an extension of a “right to marriage” to people that so far did not possess it, but simply the abolition of marriage as we know it. If this is accepted, there will be no good arguments left to prohibit “marriages” between three or more persons, or between siblings, or between parents and their children. And of course, there will ultimately be grave consequences for families: if “marriage” can be treated in this arbitrary manner, so can “family” – with the predictable result that the Government might as a next step cancel out the legal link between parents and their children – and treat children as a social resource that can be handed over to whomever it likes – including homosexual wannabe “parents”.
There also appears to be an increasing resentment against the way in which the political and media establishment try to steam-roll the public with their new concept of “marriage”.
One of Ireland’s best-known commentators, the author John Waters, finds the campaign “extremely aggressive, with overtones of what I’d call cultural fascism”.
“The behaviour of some of those promoting the amendment make it one of the ugliest mobs to descend on our public life in a very long time,” he said. “The fact that the Dublin media is virtually 100% in favour of the amendment is another factor that may militate against a yes outcome. There’s an ugly smugness in the way they present the issue and almost hold their noses if somebody argues against.”
But the greatest surprise is that Bruce Arnold, a liberal critic of the Catholic church, is calling for a no vote. “I believe in marriage between man and woman,” said Arnold, whose book The Irish Gulag deals with exploitation and sexual abuse of children in church-run schools. “Such marriage is a unique institution for the natural partnership of man and wife and for the building of a harmonious and integrated society based on the propagation of children and the eventual expansion of that seed and blood through many generations.”